The three-day peace talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan in Istanbul ended on Monday without any concrete agreement. The talks, hosted by Turkey and mediated by Qatar, were aimed at stopping the increasing conflicts on the border and making the ceasefire signed on October 19 permanent. Representatives of both sides discussed cross-border attacks, terrorist activities and mutual accusations, but no joint statement was issued. Pakistani officials alleged that the Afghan delegation was repeatedly consulting Kabul and Pakistan was getting “unencouraging” responses.
Meanwhile, Pakistan Army claimed that 25 terrorists were killed while foiling two major infiltration attempts on the border during the talks, while five Pakistani soldiers were also killed. These claims could not be independently verified.
Read this also: Here India has postponed Indus water, on the other hand Taliban will stop the water by building a dam on Kunar River, Pakistan will yearn for every drop.
On the other hand, US President Donald Trump said during the ASEAN summit held in Malaysia that he would resolve the crisis “very soon”. He welcomed peace efforts between Islamabad and Kabul and said the two countries should move towards a “durable solution”.
Let us tell you that officials of Türkiye and Qatar, who hosted these talks, are now trying to ensure that the dialogue does not fail completely. Pakistani representatives said they demanded “concrete and verifiable action” from the Afghan side against Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).
If seen, this talk held in Istanbul was not just a conversation between two countries, but was a test of the stability of the entire South Asia. Pakistan and Afghanistan—both are countries where instability, terrorism and border disputes have dogged the political structure for decades. After the return of Taliban to power (2021), Pakistan hoped that the new government in Kabul would be more sympathetic towards it and curb cross-border terrorism. But just the opposite happened. Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan increased attacks from Afghan soil and Pakistan’s western borders again became unsafe.
Pakistan’s demands during these talks were clear – Afghanistan should not allow its land to be used for anti-Pakistan terrorism. On the other hand, the stance of the Afghan Taliban was that Pakistan should improve the security and humanitarian approach on its borders. Actually this dialogue got stuck because the gap of “lack of trust” is deep on both the sides.
Let us also tell you that Türkiye and Qatar are not just the mediators of this entire process, but have emerged as the new diplomatic axis of the Islamic world. Both countries want to show that the Muslim world can solve its internal problems without Western meddling. But this effort will not be successful unless Pakistan and Afghanistan rise above their geopolitical agenda and build a bridge of mutual trust.
On the other hand, it is clear from the statement of US President Donald Trump that America no longer wants to intervene directly in this region, but is playing the role of “motivator”. This situation has mixed implications for India—on the one hand, America’s distance provides an opportunity to increase India’s strategic influence, on the other it opens the door to regional intervention by countries like China and Russia. If seen from India’s point of view, this dialogue is not just a neighboring conflict, but a strategic scenario whose consequences can be deep.
If Pakistan remains engaged on its western front, the pressure on its eastern border, i.e. the border with India, will be relatively less. But history shows that whenever Pakistan faces an internal crisis, it intensifies anti-India activities to divert attention.
India has invested heavily in Afghanistan over the past two decades in projects such as schools, roads and the Parliament building. If political instability continues in Kabul, India’s ‘soft power’ will suffer and its dream of access to Central Asia may be hampered.
At the same time, China is already increasing regional influence through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Now he is increasing investment in Afghanistan also. If the triangle of China, Pakistan and Afghanistan becomes stronger, India will have to grapple with new security equations from its northern borders to the Indian Ocean.
On the other hand, if the activities of groups like TTP, Islamic State-Khorasan (IS-K) are not controlled from Afghanistan, it will also impact the security policy of Kashmir and the Indian subcontinent. Therefore, India will have to further strengthen its intelligence cooperation and border surveillance.
If seen, the inconclusiveness of the Istanbul talks shows that South Asia has still not been freed from the circle of old distrust. The Pakistan-Afghan border, which was once the center of the American “War on Terror”, is still sitting on a pile of gunpowder. For India, a balanced but cautious approach is required in this situation—neither an emotional reaction, nor an indifferent distance. India should advance the idea of “lasting peace” in international and regional forums, while strengthening its strategic preparedness and intelligence capabilities.
The Istanbul Dialogue is a reminder that peace does not come through diplomacy alone; That requires honesty, trust and a long-term vision. Unless Kabul and Islamabad free themselves from their historical insecurities, the region will remain trapped in a cycle of instability rather than peace and India will have to be prepared for all of this. Overall, this dialogue is not a failure, but a “test phase” where the destiny of South Asia is being decided. The question is not what happened in Istanbul, but the question is whether the countries of the region will be able to muster the courage to follow the path of peace?
India will have to play a decisive role in answering this question.